OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare two methods of measuring physical function in subjects with a broad range of abilities and to evaluate the effects of cognitive, social, educational, and age factors on the relationship between the two methods. DESIGN: Multiple regression analysis was used to compare self-perceived (dependent variables) with performance measures (independent variables). Covariates included age, gender, Mini-Mental State Exam score, education, living status, and depression score. SETTING: Five community-dwelling and two nursing home sites. PARTICIPANTS: 417 community-dwelling subjects and 200 nursing home residents aged 62-98 years. MEASUREMENTS: Self-perceived physical function was assessed with the physical dimension summary score of the Sickness Impact Profile, which comprises three subscales: ambulation, mobility, and body care and movement. Physical performance was evaluated by self-selected gait speed, chair-stand time, maximal grip strength, and a balance score. RESULTS: Nursing home residents and community-dwellers were significantly different (P < .0001) in all variables except age and gender. Self-perceived and performance-based measures were moderately correlated, with a range from r = -.194 to r = -.625 (P < .05). Gait speed was the strongest independent predictor of self-perceived physical function in both groups. Symptoms of depression were also an independent predictor of self-perceived function in nursing home residents; subjects who had such symptoms report more self-perceived dysfunction than would be predicted based on performance tests. CONCLUSIONS: Self-selected gait speed is a global indicator of self-perceived physical function over a broad range of abilities. External determinants (depressive symptoms, cognitive function, marital status, etc.) affect self-perceived function in both groups, but gait speed is the greatest single predictor of self-perceived function. In nursing home residents depressive symptomatology is related to self-perceived.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare two methods of measuring physical function in subjects with a broad range of abilities and to evaluate the effects of cognitive, social, educational, and age factors on the relationship between the two methods. DESIGN: Multiple regression analysis was used to compare self-perceived (dependent variables) with performance measures (independent variables). Covariates included age, gender, Mini-Mental State Exam score, education, living status, and depression score. SETTING: Five community-dwelling and two nursing home sites. PARTICIPANTS: 417 community-dwelling subjects and 200 nursing home residents aged 62-98 years. MEASUREMENTS: Self-perceived physical function was assessed with the physical dimension summary score of the Sickness Impact Profile, which comprises three subscales: ambulation, mobility, and body care and movement. Physical performance was evaluated by self-selected gait speed, chair-stand time, maximal grip strength, and a balance score. RESULTS: Nursing home residents and community-dwellers were significantly different (P < .0001) in all variables except age and gender. Self-perceived and performance-based measures were moderately correlated, with a range from r = -.194 to r = -.625 (P < .05). Gait speed was the strongest independent predictor of self-perceived physical function in both groups. Symptoms of depression were also an independent predictor of self-perceived function in nursing home residents; subjects who had such symptoms report more self-perceived dysfunction than would be predicted based on performance tests. CONCLUSIONS: Self-selected gait speed is a global indicator of self-perceived physical function over a broad range of abilities. External determinants (depressive symptoms, cognitive function, marital status, etc.) affect self-perceived function in both groups, but gait speed is the greatest single predictor of self-perceived function. In nursing home residents depressive symptomatology is related to self-perceived.
Authors: Daniel K White; Yuqing Zhang; Jingbo Niu; Julie J Keysor; Michael C Nevitt; Cora E Lewis; James C Torner; Tuhina Neogi Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 4.794
Authors: Siddharth Bethi; Abhijit Dasgupta; Michael H Weisman; Thomas J Learch; Lianne S Gensler; John C Davis; John D Reveille; Michael M Ward Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2013-04 Impact factor: 4.794
Authors: Christine S Ritchie; Amy S Kelley; Irena Stijacic Cenzer; Alexander K Smith; Margaret L Wallhagen; Kenneth E Covinsky Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2016-08-09 Impact factor: 3.612